The 2008 Hugos, part II (response to comments)

Wow! I've apparently attracted some attention with my Hugo post. Check out the comments on the previous post.

First, Mary Robinette Kowel has bunches of free fiction online here. Also, catching up a little on her blog after posting my Hugo rundown, I see she just sold a story to Subterranean Press. I, too, love Subterranean Press. Their books are treasures, both because they tend to choose wonderful stories and because they print and bind them with top notch materials and include the most beautiful art work. A Sub Press book is a tactile and visual pleasure as well as a good read. I'm looking forward to reading both Mary's online work and her Sub Press work. (Wow, a Hugo winner commented on my blog! That is so cool!)

I also got a comment from Nadine. I'm not sure who she is, but it sounds like she either knows Michael Chabon professionally or she's a knowledgeable fan. She indirectly pointed out that my rant was a bit harsh. She's right. I'm not sore about Michael Chabon, in particular, publishing SF under a mainstream imprint. To be quite honest The Yiddish Policeman's Union caught my eye even before it landed on the Hugo nominations list. I haven't read it yet simply because I'm a somewhat slow reader (especially during bicycling season) and my to-be-read pile is taking over my house.

Here's the problem: I can't decide if it's in the best interest of the science-fiction/fantasy community to hand a Hugo to a book printed under a mainstream imprint. On the one hand, the Hugo is and always has been a genre award. Is it a good idea to award Hugos to books that aren't publicly considered SF when there's so much excellent SF out there? On the other hand, this sort of thing might attract new readers and writers to the genre. By poking our heads out in the mainstream world and saying "hey, that mainstream novel is actually SF and we really liked it," we might make the literary world aware that a great deal of SF is literary, relevant, well written, accessible, diverse, and worth reading.

Did we award a non-SF work an SF award? Or did we recognize an outstanding SF story wrapped in a mainstream package?

Nadine's comments about alternate history are worth addressing here also. Alternate history has been a popular SF element for quite some time. PK Dick's The Man in the High Castle comes instantly to mind and is probably the most classic strait up example. Mary Gentle's Book of Ash series includes some fantasy elements as well as alternate history. The Axis of Time series by John Birmingham is a recently popular SF alternate history of WWII. I haven't read any Harry Turtledove, but he's known for writing fantasy alternate histories. I've read a ton of Tim Powers. Much of his stuff is considered secret history which I would consider the fraternal twin to alternate history.

I'm not particularly well read when it comes to modern mainstream fiction. If alternate history actually is a fairly common mainstream element, I'm not aware of it. Also, if the alternate history element in The Yiddish Policeman's Union doesn't make it SF, what does? Because if there's no science fiction or fantasy elements, it may very well be an excellent novel, but it shouldn't have been eligible for a Hugo. I don't care how amazing a book is, I think we want to exercise some care about what we set out there as the best sci-fi/fantasy novel of a given year. Anyhow, I'd better go read it before I get myself into any more trouble here.

To be perfectly honest, most of the angst in my rant comes from my brief experience with McCarthy's The Road. You see, when The Road first hit the shelves I was told I must go read this book. "It's SF, you'll love it," I was told. Oprah had just endorsed the book. Oprah's endorsement tends to be the mark of the beast in my mind. I just plain don't like the same books Oprah likes. The novels she endorses tend to be chock full of loneliness, misery, and woe. The Road is no exception. I stood in the middle of the bookstore and popped that book open to the middle (as I often do when I want to sample the flavor of a book) and started reading. I barely got through two pages before realizing that if I didn't set it down right away I was going to send it flying into into the far wall of the store. If mainstream readers think this is a good example of sci-fi... oh sweet lord save us my genre is doomed.

Look, Oprah, if you want to read loneliness, misery, and woe, go ahead, read The Road. If you want to read a well written, literary, post apocalyptic novel go check the SF shelves for A Canticle for Leibowitz by Miller. That's my favorite of the many post apocalyptic novels I've read. The post apocalypse is a super popular old school SF theme. It's been done a zillion times. Don't go thinking The Road is something new and different, because as far as I can tell, it's a miserable example of a well worn theme. It just got stacked on a different shelf.

So my angst about The Road got mixed up with my mixed feelings and reservations about handing a Hugo to a main stream novel that is of unclear sf-ness.

Directly, I apologize for calling Chabon a jerk. That was totally out of line. I'm sorry. I'm sure he's a very nice person and I'm impressed to learn from Nadine that he's a member of the SFWA. Also I don't find any fault with his inability to attend WorldCon. I'm even fairly sure I'll like his book when I read it. While I remain skeptical, I promise to withhold final judgment regarding the book's Hugo worthiness until after I've read it. It's now firmly on my winter reading list and I plan to report back here.

2008 Hugo Awards

The 2008 Hugo results were announced last weekend. If you're not a Science Fiction fan or a follower of literary awards in general, then you probably have no idea what I'm talking about.

Science Fiction has two major awards, the Nebula and the Hugo. Nebula winners are chosen by the Science Fiction Writers Association (SFWA). The voters are professional writers so the winning works tend to be more literary and often more edgy or groundbreaking. The Hugo winners, on the other hand, are ostensibly chosen by the fans. The Hugo voting and awarding both happen every year at the World Science Fiction Convention. Attendees and anyone that wishes to pay for a supporting membership to the convention are permitted to cast a Hugo ballot.

Here's a rundown of this year's Hugo winners:

• Best Novel: The Yiddish Policemen’s Union by Michael Chabon (HarperCollins; Fourth Estate)
• Best Novella: “All Seated on the Ground” by Connie Willis (Asimov’s Dec. 2007; Subterranean Press)
• Best Novelette: “The Merchant and the Alchemist’s Gate” by Ted Chiang (Subterranean Press; F&SF Sept. 2007)
• Best Short Story: “Tideline” by Elizabeth Bear (Asimov’s June 2007)
• Best Related Book: Brave New Words: The Oxford Dictionary of Science Fiction by Jeff Prucher (Oxford University Press)
• Best Dramatic Presentation, Long Form: Stardust Written by Jane Goldman and Matthew Vaughn, Based on the novel by Neil Gaiman Illustrated by Charles Vess Directed by Matthew Vaughn (Paramount Pictures)
• Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form: Doctor Who “Blink” Written by Steven Moffat Directed by Hettie Macdonald (BBC)
• Best Editor, Long Form: David G. Hartwell
• Best Editor, Short Form: Gordon Van Gelder
• Best Professional Artist: Stephan Martiniere
• Best Semiprozine: Locus
• Best Fanzine: File 770
• Best Fan Writer: John Scalzi
• Best Fan Artist: Brad Foster
• John W. Campbell Award for Best New Writer: Mary Robinette Kowal
  

Starting with the novella (I'll come back to the novel at the end):

Connie Willis is my all time favorite. I love her. If I ever met her I would go all gaga-fan-girl and drool on her shoes and beg her to sign everything I own including my arm. I own at least one copy of every novel she's ever published, including some of the early ones that are hard to find. She is brilliant and funny and engaging and witty and... you get the picture. I could go on and on. I won't. I will tell you "All Seated on the Ground" is good, but not my favorite of her works. I believe it's filler while she works on a rumored massive novel set during the blitz in London that we've all been waiting for forever now. She's been publishing these little novellas every year for the past several years. None of them are bad (we are talking about the goddess of humorous science fiction here, after all, she's not capable of "bad"). But even the best of her novellas can't touch her novels. I'm really craving that next novel. These little novellas are lovely and enjoyable but it's like a little nibble of a snack when what you really want is a four course meal. I want that blitz novel.


On to the Novelette:

I haven't read “The Merchant and the Alchemist’s Gate” but I've heard good things. I'll have to track it down. Answer me this, though: What the heck is a novelette? I understand that there's a word-count definition available here (SFWA says a work between 7,500 and 17,500 words) but that, in my opinion, is a silly way to categorize literary works.

The difference between a novel and a short story is clear in the structure. Generally a short story has a single major beat to the plot and no more than one or two developed characters. Often all the characters are simple sketches or stereotypes and none are actually developed. A short story usually contains a single major idea -- a theme that can be summed up in a single sentence.

A Novel generally has a plot line with several beats usually accompanied by subplots and tangents and played out by one or more well developed major characters, who grow and change (or pointedly don't) as a result of the plot. A novel can easily contain several complex themes.

If a short story is a single at bat, then a novel might be a whole season of play or even the entire life's story of the batter.

Given those definitions based on literary elements rather than word count, I'm satisfied with the concept of a novella as something in between. For example, "All Seated on the Ground" has a plot with several beats, but a single theme and only one somewhat well developed character (the narrator).

So, can someone please differentiate a novelette for me without using word count? If it can't be differentiated without word count, why the heck does it deserve it's own award category?


The Short Story:

Ahhhh! E. Bear. Prolific, brilliant, literary, challenging, wonderful Bear. I can plow through a Connie Willis novel in 2 or 3 days. A novel of the same word count written by Elizabeth Bear might take me a month. She's a challenge to read because her work is layer upon layer packed full of ideas and allusions and complex, fascinating, often abused, and usually broken characters. Bear expects her readers to be intelligent, attentive, and well read. And I love her for it even if some of her stuff does fly right over my head.

I read "Tideline" in Asimov's when it was first published last summer. I didn't actually like it the first time I read it. I re-read it a couple months ago and walked away with a completely different opinion. It's fantastic. For some odd reason, the second read made me think of "Puff the Magic Dragon". In any case, it's a good story. Go read it for yourself and tell me what you think.

Bear better make some space on her mantle for all the awards she's going to win over the next few years. The woman is talented. And prolific, did I mention prolific?


The rest. Gonna skip a few categories here and just briefly comment on others:

Drama, Long form: Stardust by Neil Gaiman is a fantastically amazing brilliant and wonderful book. It's a fairytale in the spirit of the brothers Grimm -- dark and chilling and magical and heartwarming all at the same time. The movie was... eh.. pretty good. It sort of rounded off the edges, and the edges were the best part. But we're grading on a curve here and I suppose Stardust the movie was slightly better than the Golden Compass movie (also a far far better book than movie), and the rest of the nominees weren't even in the same league. So there you have it. Ok movie, worth renting. If you're a reader, go read the book instead.

Drama, Short form: Umm... I have a confession. I really don't get the fascination with Dr Who. I've tried watching it, I just can't get into it. Maybe, in the shadow of Farscape and Firefly (best SF TV shows EVER!) I'm expecting too much from my SF TV?

Locus, semiprozine? Locus pretty much is the journal of the professional SF world, so far as I know. Also, no fiction in Locus. huh. I guess I don't grok that category. ("grok": That word would likely be found in the Oxford Dictionary of Science Fiction, winner of best related book Hugo, which I just added to my amazon wishlist.)

Hey! Scalzi got a Hugo! For best fan writer? Umm.. hey guys? News flash: Scalzi is a professional published author and his blog, The Whatever, while wildly popular and quite fun to read, is a promotional tool. Shouldn't best fan writer go to someone writing fan-fic? Oh well, Scalzi deserves a Hugo. And this one will have to do until we hand him one for best novel or the Hugo folks add a category for best SF blog/podcast. Which, really, they should do right away because blogs and podcasts are contributing to the SF genre in a major way these days.

Best new writer, Mary Robinette Kowal... umm... where's the work? 'cause really I wanna read it and I can't find it. I've read and very much enjoyed her blog. I've listened to her read a few different stories and fell head over heels in love with her voice. Seriously, she could read the telephone book out loud and I'd enjoy listening. She's very active in the SF community but I honestly can't find her stories and I really want to read them.

Ok, going back to best novel:

I apologize in advance for my rant. I'm just a wee bit miffed about this one. Why? Oh why? Why in the world? Why on god's green earth would SF fans vote for some jerk that won't even allow his work to be filed in the SF section of the bookstore? I don't care how good his novel is, I'm quite hesitant to put my hard earned book money into the hands of some fool that writes SF but is too darn good to admit he's an SF author. What is wrong with you people? You're promoting this author/publisher/agent that thinks you're just a bunch of useless geeks with no literary taste!

All right, all right. Maybe Chabon himself doesn't think he's too good for SF-fandom but his publisher and his agent must. And that's just as bad. The Audrey Niffeneggers (Time Traveler's Wife), the Cormac McCarthys (that post-apocalyptic rip-off dung-heap called The Road), and the Micheal Chabon's of the world can all go piss up a flagpole. They want to use the tools of SF (time travel, post-apocalypse, alternate history) without being directly compared to other writers in the genre. They don't want to be considered genre authors. By denying that their work is SF they further and promote the idea that SF cannot be literary or relevant, that it does not speak about values and concepts and the ways in which we choose to live our lives.

I have news for you fools that think you're too good for the SF shelves.

You are too good to sit alongside Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury, a book that shows us the dangers of mass media and the cautions us not to shut out concepts and ideas that diverge from the popular.

Your novels too important to rub shoulders with Orwell's 1984, or Huxley's Brave New World, or Zamyatin's We. Distopias all, without which we would not have the concepts or a healthy fear of Big Brother, groupthink, or soma.

And don't forget Asimov's Foundation about fate and free will. Or Le Guin's Left Hand of Darkness about gender politics.

How 'bout Frank Herbert's Dune? Among it's other epic themes, it's about winning the hearts and minds of a religious desert people who control a vital economic resource -- that couldn't possibly be relevant today!

Then there's Elizabeth Moon's The Speed of Dark about an autistic man. This book raises critical moral and ethical questions about our advancing medical skills and technology.

Oh, and you certainly wouldn't want your work to be seen near Peter Watts's Blindsight, a deeply chilling and utterly brilliant novel about the nature and utility of self consciousness.

Your novel is literature and these are science fiction, and never the two shall meet! I wonder, Michael Chabon and Harper Collins, will you stamp "Hugo award Winner" on the next printing of this book? Or "by the Hugo award winning author" on your next release? Will you now embrace SF, after initially shunning it, now that the SF community has recognized you as one of our own and embraced you? Maybe, just maybe, you'll discover that we're not all geeky Star Trek obsessed adolescent boys.

Will I eventually read The Yiddish Policeman's Union? Yes, most likely I will. I've made a point in the last several years of reading all the past Hugo award winners and reading many of the past nominees. And, there's a flip side to my rant here... Perhaps by recognizing a main stream novel with a major SF award we will make the non-SF reading community aware that SF can be, and often is literary and well worth reading. Maybe a few literary snobs out there read this book before we handed it a Hugo and will now think "Hey, I read that, I liked it. It's SF? huh. Maybe there's other SF out there worth reading." And that would be a victory for SF.

So maybe there's a silver lining, but I'm still grouchy about all these folks that write SF but are squeamish about being labeled as SF writers.

There you have it, the 2008 Hugos and my opinions.. and my rants . Check out the Denvention Hugo nomination page to see a list of all this year's nominees. Most of the shorter works are available online, linked from that Denvention page. And if you prefer to give them a listen, escape pod podcasted four of the five short story nominees including Bear's "Tideline".

If this post bored you to tears, I promise there's more biking content coming soon, and probably other stuff too... and if you enjoyed this, well, there's more SF commentary in the works as well. I'm gonna try to shorten things up around here and post a little more often. I don't make any promises, though.